The 2014 U.S. Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services “Settings Rule,” which took effect in 2023, restricts Home and Community Based Services funding for adults with intellectual disabilities to small integrated settings and person-centered supports. The Settings Rule responds to the fact that community services, mandated by the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) and the Supreme Court Olmstead ruling, while integrated physically, often operate as institutions. The Settings Rule is meant to create integration and individualization. I argue that the regulation cannot, on its own, accomplish these goals. The deinstitutionalization movement has had mixed outcomes—and without change across multiple socio-ecological systems, the Settings Rule will also deliver mixed results.
AmadoA.StancliffeR.McCarronM.McCallionP. (2013). Social inclusion and community participation of individuals with intellectual/developmental disabilities. Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities, 51(5), 360–375. https://doi.org/10.1352/1934-9556-51.5.360
2.
American Network of Community Options and Resources. (2022). The state of America’s direct support workforce crisis. http://www.ancor.org
3.
BakerD. (2011). The politics of neurodiversity: Why public policy matters. Lynne Rienner.
BigbyC.AndersonS.CameronN. (2018). Identifying conceptualizations and theories of change embedded in interventions to facilitate community participation for people with intellectual disability: A scoping review. Journal of Applied Research in Intellectual Disabilities, 31(2), 165–180. https://doi.org/10.1111/jar.12390
6.
BigbyC.ClementT.MansellJ.Beadle-BrownJ. (2009). “It’s pretty hard with our ones, they can’t talk, the more able bodied can participate”: Staff attitudes about the applicability of disability policies to people with severe and profound intellectual disabilities. Journal of Intellectual Disability Research, 53(4), 363–376. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2788.2009.01154.x
7.
BigbyC.KnoxM.Beadle-BrownJ.ClementT.MansellJ. (2012). Uncovering dimensions of culture in underperforming group homes for people with severe intellectual disability. Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities, 50(6), 452–467. https://doi.org/10.1352/1934-9556-50.06.452
8.
BronfenbrennerU. (1979). The ecology of human development: Experiments by nature and design. Harvard University Press.
9.
BuntinxW.SchalockR. (2010). Models of disability, quality of life and individualized supports: Implications for professional practice in intellectual disability. Journal of Policy and Practice in Intellectual Disabilities, 7(4), 283–294. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1741-1130.2010.00278.x
10.
BurkeT.DeffewA.StaffordO.DochertyC.BurkeS.MostertR.Van LoonJ.LombardiM.VaughnM.BrickellR.KeoghM.MahonW.O’HalloranD. (2022). Quality of life outcomes in a community cohort of adults with an intellectual disability using the Personal Outcome Scale. Frontiers in Rehabilitation Sciences, 3, Article 848492. https://doi.org/10.3389/fresc.2022.848492
CareyA. (2009). On the margins of citizenship. Temple University Press.
13.
CohenS. (2013). Advocacy for the “Abandonados”: Harnessing cultural beliefs for Latino families and their children with intellectual disabilities. Journal of Policy and Practice in Intellectual Disabilities, 10(1), 71–78. https://doi.org/10.1111/jppi.12021
DeneauJ.CarrK.SutherlandC.AzarN.HortonS. (2020). Adapting sport and physical activity for individuals with IDD. Sport Information Resource Center. http://www.sirc.ca
17.
FelceD. (2017). Community living for adults with intellectual disabilities: Unravelling the cost effectiveness discourse. Journal of Policy and Practice in Intellectual Disabilities, 14(3), 187–197. https://doi.org/10.1111/jppi.12180
18.
FinlayM.WaltonC.AntakiC. (2008). Promoting choice and control in residential services for people with learning disabilities. Disability and Society, 23(4), 349–360. https://doi.org/10.1080/09687590802038860
19.
FriedmanC. (2019a). The influence of residence type on personal outcomes. Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities, 57(2), 112–126. https://doi.org/10.1352/1934-9556-57.2.112
20.
FriedmanC. (2019b). There’s no place like home: A national study of how people with intellectual and/or developmental disabilities and their families choose where to live. The Council on Quality and Leadership. https://www.researchgate.net
21.
FriedmanC. (2019c). Family members of people with disabilities’ explicit and implicit disability attitudes. Rehabilitation Psychology, 64(2), 203–211. https://doi.org/10.1037/rep0000265
22.
FysonR. (2009). Independence and learning disabilities: Why we must also recognize vulnerability. Journal of Adult Protection, 11(3), 18–25. https://doi.org/10.1108/14668203200900018
23.
GottoG.CalkinsC.JacksonL.WalkerH.BeckmannC. (2010). Accessing social capital: Implications for persons with disabilities. Association of University Centers on Disabilities. https://www.aucd.org
24.
GouldJ. (2021). Duty, not gratuity: The ethics of social support for people with intellectual disabilities in the United States. Disability and Society, 36(8), 1240–1260. https://doi.org/10.1080/09687599.2020.1787817.
HewittA.MacBethJ.MerrillB.KleistB. (2018). The direct support workforce crisis: A systematic failure. Impact, 31(1), 3–7. http://www.ici.umn.edu
27.
HolburnS.JacobsonJ.SchwartzA.FloryM.VeitzeP. (2004). The Willowbrook futures project: A longitudinal analysis of person-centered planning. American Journal on Mental Retardation, 109(1), 63–76. https://doi.org/10.1352/0895-8017(2004)109<63:TWFPA>2.0.CO;2
28.
IkaheimoH. (2009). Personhood and the social inclusion of people with disabilities: A recognition-theoretical approach. In KristiansenK.VehmasS.ShakespeareT. (Eds.), Arguing about disability (pp. 77–92). Routledge.
KeithJ.BennettoL.RoggeR. (2015). The relationship between contact and attitudes: Reducing prejudice toward individuals with intellectual and developmental disabilities. Research in Developmental Disabilities, 47, 14–26. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ridd.2015.07.032
31.
KozmaA.MansellJ.Beadle-BrownJ. (2009). Outcomes in different residential settings for people with intellectual disability: A systematic review. American Journal on Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities, 114(3), 193–222. https://doi.org/10.1352/1944-7558-114.3.193
32.
LodgeA.KaufmanL.ManserS. (2017). Barriers to implementing person-centered recovery planning in public mental health organizations in Texas: Results from nine focus groups. Administration and Policy in Mental Health and Mental Health Services Research, 44(3), 413–429. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10488-016-0732-7
33.
MansellJ.Beadle-BrownJ.WheltonB.BeckettC.HutchinsonA. (2007). Effect of service structure and organization on staff care practices in small community homes for people with intellectual disabilities. Journal of Applied Research in Intellectual Disabilities, 21(5), 398–413. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-3148.2007.00410.x
34.
MaybeeJ. (2020). Making and unmaking disability. Rowman & Littlefield.
35.
McCauslandD.MurphyE.McCarronM.McCallionP. (2021). The potential for person- centered planning to support the community participation of adults with an intellectual disability. Journal of Intellectual Disabilities, 26(3), 1–21. https://doi.org/10.1177/17446295211022125
36.
McConkeyR.CollinsS. (2010). The role of support staff in promoting the social inclusion of persons with an intellectual disability. Journal of Intellectual Disability Research, 54(8), 691–700. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2788.2010.01295.x
MoesleyC. (2013). The ADA Olmstead and Medicaid: Implications for people with intellectual and developmental disabilities. National Association of State Directors of Developmental Disabilities Services. https://www.mn.gov
41.
National Arts and Disability Center. (n.d.). Semel Institute for Neuroscience and Human Behavior. http://www.semel.ucla.edu.
ObisikeE.WallaceL.AlexanderJ.BrouwerM. (2012). Enhancing person-centered planning for adults living with disabilities using dynamic organizational culture. European Scientific Journal, 8, Article 29. https://doi.org/10.19044/esj.2012.v8n29p%25p
44.
Pelleboer-GunnickH.van OorsouwW.van WeeghelJ.EmbregtsJ. (2019). Stigma research in the field of intellectual disabilities: A scoping review on the perspective of care providers. International Journal of Developmental Disabilities, 67(3), 168–187. https://doi.org/10.1080/20473869.2019.1616990
45.
PilnickA.CleggJ.MurphyE.AlmackK. (2010). Questioning the answer: Questioning style, choice and self-determination in interactions with young people with intellectual disabilities. Sociology of Health and Illness, 32(3), 415–436. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9566.2009.01223.x
President’s Committee for People with Intellectual Disabilities. (2017). America’s direct support workforce crisis. https://www.nadsp.org
48.
RattiV.HassiotisA.CrabtreeJ.DebS.GallagherP.UnwineG. (2016). The effectiveness of person-centered planning for people with intellectual disabilities: A systematic review. Research in Developmental Disabilities, 57, 63–84. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ridd.2016.06.015
49.
RobertsonJ.HattonC.EmersonE.ElliottJ.McIntoshB.SwiftP.Krinjen-KempE.TowersC.RomeoR.KnappM.SandersonH.RoutledgeM.OakesP.JoyceT. (2007). Reported barriers to the implementation of person-centered planning for people with intellectual disabilities in the UK. Journal of Applied Research in Intellectual Disabilities, 20(4), 297–307. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-3148.2006.00333.x
50.
RyanS.Runswick-ColeK. (2008). Repositioning mothers: Mothers, disabled children and disability studies. Disability & Society, 23(3), 199–210. https://doi.org/10.1080/09687590801953937
51.
SchalockR.BonhamG.VerdugoM. (2008a). The conceptualization and measurement of quality of life: Implications for program planning and evaluation in the field of intellectual disabilities. Evaluation and Program Planning, 31(2), 181–190. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.evalprogplan.2008.02.001
52.
SchalockR.VerdugoM.BonhamG.FantovaF.Van LoonJ. (2008b). Enhancing personal outcomes: Organizational strategies, guidelines and examples. Journal of Policy and Practice in Intellectual Disabilities, 5(4), 276–285. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1741-1130.2007.00135.x
53.
SeewoourttunL.SciorK. (2014). Interventions aimed at increasing knowledge and improving attitudes towards people with intellectual disabilities among lay people. Research in Developmental Disabilities, 35(12), 3482–3495. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ridd.2014.07.028
54.
ShogrenK.BradleyV.GomezS.YeagerM.SchalockR. (2009). Public policy and the enhancement of desired outcomes for persons with intellectual disability. Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities, 47(4), 307–319. https://doi.org/10.1352/1934-9556-47.4.307
55.
SimplicanS.LeaderG.KosciulekJ.LeahyM. (2015). Defining social inclusion of people with intellectual and developmental disabilities: An ecological model of social networks and community participation. Research in Developmental Disabilities, 38, 18–29. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ridd.2014.10.008
56.
SpassianiN.FriedmanC. (2014). Stigma: Barriers to culture and identity for people with intellectual disabilities. Inclusion, 2(4), 329–341. https://doi.org/10.1352/2326-6988-2.4.329
57.
TanisE. (2020). The state of the states in intellectual and developmental disabilities data brief. http://www.stateofthestates.org
58.
TerhuneP. (2005). African-American developmental disability discourses: Implications for policy development. Journal of Policy and Practice in Intellectual Disabilities, 2(1), 18–28. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1741-1130.2005.00004.x
59.
ThornS.PittmanA.MyersR.SlaughterC. (2009). Increasing community integration and inclusion for people with intellectual disabilities. Research in Developmental Disabilities, 30(5), 891–901. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ridd.2009.01.001
60.
TicháR.HewittA.NordD.LarsonS. (2013). System and individual outcomes and their predictors in services and support for people with IDD. Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities, 51(5), 298–315. https://doi.org/10.1352/1934-9556-51.5.298
61.
TicháR.LakinC.LarsonS.StancliffeR.TaubS.EnglerJ.BershadskyJ.MoseleyC. (2012). Correlates of everyday choice and support-related choice for 8,892 randomly sampled adults with intellectual and developmental disabilities in 19 states. Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities, 50(6), 486–504. https://doi.org/10.1352/1934-9556-50.06.486
62.
VerdonschotM.de WitteL.ReichrathE.BuntinxW.CurfsL. (2009). Impact of environmental factors on community participation of persons with an intellectual disability: A systematic review. Journal of Intellectual Disability Research, 53(1), 54–64. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2788.2008.01128.x
63.
WalkerH.CalkinsC.WehmeyerM.WalkerL.BaconA.PalmerS.JesienG.NygrenM.HellerT.GottoG.AberyP.JohnsonD. (2011). A socio-ecological approach to promote self-determination. Exceptionality, 19(1), 6–18. https://doi.org/10.1080/09362835.2011.537220
